View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |